Eight stabbed and man held in 'major incident'

[Nearly Sane]

So if there is no 'organisation' who was releasing details of immigration lawyers to their online communities yesterday. Who was falsely reporting - and re-posting - incorrect claims that the Southport attacker was a muslim asylum seeker who'd arrived on a boat last year.

Poeple don't randomly decide to travel 20 miles on the offchance there might be a protest or a demonstration - nope they travel there because they know when and where those protests will be taking place. And that only happens with a level of organisation.

See my Reply 20 on this thread. That there are people manipulating others on this subject does mean that it's a  regimented organisation as the remarks of the police chief implied. Drummond is just a random thug.

[Nearly Sane]

Spot on - and the levels of organisation tend to be more 'organic' rather than associated with some formal 'organisation' but that doesn't make it any less effective. The combination of like minded people living within a social media echo chamber with 'influencers' amplifying messages that may (or may not) be entirely false along with someone simply providing information about a place is sufficient to generate a crowd at that place who may well be bent on violence.

It doesn't actually need someone to be as overt as saying let's burn down a mosque or immigration accommodation (and I suspect those manipulating the organisation would be smart enough to avoid this), merely to point out to their social media community that this hotel or that hotel in their local vicinity (and that may be tens of miles away) is housing asylum seekers. The rest is nod and wink stuff.

I don't  disagree with this, and yet I think the statement from the police chief implies something much more organised and therefore overestimates the organisation involved.

[ProfessorDavey]

Drummond is just a random thug.

No he isn't or he wouldn't have travelled 20 miles from his home to commit his thuggery to join in with a bunch of others heading towards a mosque that I image he never even knew existed prior to the events. He did that as a deliberate decision, triggered by a level of on-line organisation and orchestration which is fuelling the disturbances and choreographing where they happen.

[jeremyp]

Apparently the 'rumoured far right protests' didn't happen because of a lot of police, which didn't stop anti far right protests, and the first sentences handed out. Feels like bollocks to me as it over estimates the organisation involved so far, and the impact and speed of impact of sentencing. Also plays down 'rumoured'.

Read all about it: random person on the Internet knows more about how these "far right" protests are organised than the policing minister with access to police reports and intelligence.

On a lighter note, a nurse friend of mine said that A&E on Saturday in the BRI treated nine people with dog bites. Many of them were in handcuffs.

[ProfessorDavey]

Read all about it: random person on the Internet knows more about how these "far right" protests are organised than the policing minister with access to police reports and intelligence.

Indeed - I find NS's complacency about this rather worrying.

People do not 'randomly' find themselves marching on a mosque in a town 20 miles away from where they live. That this happened suggests some significant organisation and orchestration of the events. That is also the case for the counter demonstrations too.

[Nearly Sane]

Read all about it: random person on the Internet knows more about how these "far right" protests are organised than the policing minister with access to police reports and intelligence.

On a lighter note, a nurse friend of mine said that A&E on Saturday in the BRI treated nine people with dog bites. Many of them were in handcuffs.

Or person with interest in saying they did something well says they did something well. As already noted, there are those who are stoking up the violence who agree with the police chief, and say it was all part of a cunning plan. Which if they are as organised as the police chief implies means that they are correct and it was a giant feint that the police fell for.

[Nearly Sane]

Indeed - I find NS's complacency about this rather worrying.

People do not 'randomly' find themselves marching on a mosque in a town 20 miles away from where they live. That this happened suggests some significant organisation and orchestration of the events. That is also the case for the counter demonstrations too.

I'm not complacent, indeed, I think the self congratulatory tone of the police chiefs remarks are dangerous because it doesn't take significant organisation to achieve this.

[ProfessorDavey]

I'm not complacent, ...

I disagree - you seem to be implying that someone who lives in Liverpool just randomly finds themselves with hundreds of other people marching on a mosque in a town 20 miles away without a level of organisation and orchestration of those events.

You won't see the social media, and neither will I becasue the algorithms wont push that stuff to us. But I have no doubt that for those of that mind set their social media would have been filled with amplification of messaging and false messaging and indication that if you want to be heard get to Southport, or Bristol or Newcastle etc - with indication of time and place.

Now perhaps you are in a different social media set - one where messaging about the counter demonstrations was being pushed towards you - I know I was, and would have easliy have been able to know when and where counterdemonstrations were planned. That's call organisation.

[Nearly Sane]

I disagree - you seem to be implying that someone who lives in Liverpool just randomly finds themselves with hundreds of other people marching on a mosque in a town 20 miles away without a level of organisation and orchestration of those events.

You won't see the social media, and neither will I becasue the algorithms wont push that stuff to us. But I have no doubt that for those of that mind set their social media would have been filled with amplification of messaging and false messaging and indication that if you want to be heard get to Southport, or Bristol or Newcastle etc - with indication of time and place.

Now perhaps you are in a different social media set - one where messaging about the counter demonstrations was being pushed towards you - I know I was, and would have easliy have been able to know when and where counterdemonstrations were planned. That's call organisation.

I don't mean to imply that it was a random event, indeed I would ask you to read my reply 20 here as it's clear thar I don't think it's a random event. Also in the post thar you've just quotemined from I'm clearly disagreeing about the amount of organisation that it takes, not that it takes mo organisation. It is as you said in a post that I said I agreed with organic, not regimented.

I find it quite amazing that you know what social media I light see, and even more so because you are wrong. As ad_orientem notes on another thread, he uses X to try and keep an eye on the 'enemy'.

[ProfessorDavey]

I find it quite amazing that you know what social media I light see, and even more so because you are wrong. As ad_orientem notes on another thread, he uses X to try and keep an eye on the 'enemy'.

Apologies if I presumed wrong about what gets pushed to you via social media. Although there remains a world of difference between getting stuff because you are 'keeping an eye on your enemy' and getting pushed stuff becasue it aligns with your actual views and opinions. But regardless of whether you are trying to keep an eye on your enemy, just becasue you haven't been pushed stuff about the Southport attacker being a muslim, aslym seeker that arrived on a boat doesn't mean others aren't. And just becasue you may not be receiving stuff orchestrating time and place of protest doesn't mean others aren't.

So my social media was sending me plenty of stuff yesterday that would have allowed me to find and join one of the counter demonstrations yesterday had I chosen to do so. Why would you not assume that those on the extreme right were not receiving organisaitonal content letting them know where and when their demonstrations would take place. It is pretty clear they would and they did - or otherwise why would a guy from Liverpool end up with hundreds of others (probably plenty of whom were also from miles away) marching on a mosque in Southport.

[Nearly Sane]

Apologies if I presumed wrong about what gets pushed to you via social media. Although there remains a world of difference between getting stuff because you are 'keeping an eye on your enemy' and getting pushed stuff becasue it aligns with your actual views and opinions. But regardless of whether you are trying to keep an eye on your enemy, just becasue you haven't been pushed stuff about the Southport attacker being a muslim, aslym seeker that arrived on a boat doesn't mean others aren't. And just becasue you may not be receiving stuff orchestrating time and place of protest doesn't mean others aren't.

So my social media was sending me plenty of stuff yesterday that would have allowed me to find and join one of the counter demonstrations yesterday had I chosen to do so. Why would you not assume that those on the extreme right were not receiving organisaitonal content letting them know where and when their demonstrations would take place. It is pretty clear they would and they did - or otherwise why would a guy from Liverpool end up with hundreds of others (probably plenty of whom were also from miles away) marching on a mosque in Southport.

Where have I said that there were no such posts, and that I didn't see them?

Again read reply 20, and I make clear that there is manipulation, and what I think the tragedy of this is. It would help if you did that rather than use your wonky mind reading.

[ad_orientem]

I don't believe there's one big mastermind behind all this, but that's not to say that certain national (or even international) groups haven't been stocking fire, so to speak. At ground level, at least, from what I've seen on social media, any organisation has happened through already well established networks like football fans, for example, Football Fans Against Extremism. A rather laughable name, mostly old football hooligans who are also Tommy Robinson fans. Any organisation is probably more akin to that of the old football firms.

[jeremyp]

Or person with interest in saying they did something well says they did something well. As already noted, there are those who are stoking up the violence who agree with the police chief, and say it was all part of a cunning plan. Which if they are as organised as the police chief implies means that they are correct and it was a giant feint that the police fell for.

False dichotomy.

There's a spectrum between totally disorganised rabble and 5D chess playing super-villain.

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't believe there's one big mastermind behind all this, but that's not to say that certain national (or even international) groups haven't been stocking fire, so to speak. At ground level, at least, from what I've seen on social media, any organisation has happened through already well established networks like football fans, for example, Football Fans Against Extremism. A rather laughable name, mostly old football hooligans who are also Tommy Robinson fans. Any organisation is probably more akin to that of the old football firms.

Yup that's about right. You don't need to have a formal organisation, with a membership ... and a regular newsletter! to achieve the same sort of organisation and orchestration of activity using a much more diffuse social media push, often via on-line groups such as the one you mentioned. My understanding is that the platform of choice for many of these activists is Telegram - which I don't use at all.

And AO, you will no doubt be aware that a lot of hooliganism back in the day had a fairly organised element to it - with hooligans from one club knowing full well when and where they'd be meeting up with hooligans from another club for a scrap.

[Nearly Sane]

False dichotomy.

There's a spectrum between totally disorganised rabble and 5D chess playing super-villain.

I agree, but I think that the police chief's comment did that though. I think it doesn't need to be anywhere as well organised as that implies to be dangerous.

[ProfessorDavey]

I agree, but I think that the police chief's comment did that though. I think it doesn't need to be anywhere as well organised as that implies to be dangerous.

I don't think the police are implying some kind of super-organised structure run by a super villian. Actually a much more diffuse structure is both more effrective (and therefore more dangerous) not least becasue it is much harder to monitor and infiltrate by the police.

Traffic on Telegram in the UK surged in the hours leading up to the Southport disturbances. Were all those folk suddenly feeling the need to message each other more about the price of fish!!

[Nearly Sane]

I don't think the police are implying some kind of super-organised structure run by a super villian. Actually a much more diffuse structure is both more effrective (and therefore more dangerous) not least becasue it is much harder to monitor and infiltrate by the police.

Traffic on Telegram in the UK surged in the hours leading up to the Southport disturbances. Were all those folk suddenly feeling the need to message each other more about the price of fish!!

Has anyone suggested they were talking about fish? And, I've already covered that it's the lack of a need for any structure or real organisation that makes this sort of stuff dangerous, and harder to combat. Indeed that's what the post you replied to there is covering.

[ProfessorDavey]

Has anyone suggested they were talking about fish? And, I've already covered that it's the lack of a need for any structure or real organisation that makes this sort of stuff dangerous, and harder to combat. Indeed that's what the post you replied to there is covering.

But your whole thesis seems to be that there wasn't much organisation and that the guy who was jailed for 3 years was just a random drunk thug. You are wrong on both counts.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/revealed-inside-far-telegram-messaging-070915614.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJaHaZwr7AuyFXpnr4730YKgymaQegJ09lU5-5jC9lGaxL-EPfmRkMQD6RpmzkpI7jN2F_vjJV6-GHQ3qFsJVR6YnznLz_C2UcHjQYMAsbRfDvFK-X_GmAVzSxVnHekG8B185IjMFqj2KVOuSdJf4hO0gIR40nlYBtmzC8-Hb8ZC

Note this:

"Following the killings, a broadcast channel on messaging app Telegram was set up, titled ‘Southport Wake Up’. It would remain open for nearly a week, amassing over 13,000 members.

The earliest messages in the channel were used to organise and mobilise the far-right rioters in Southport on 30 July who attacked a mosque. It remained open, sharing locations for rioters to mobilise over the weekend, with some of the plans resulting in widespread disorder and destruction of property."

Sounds pretty organised to me and if someone received this information, either directly or indirectly, and on that basis decided to travel 20 miles to take part in the riot, then that can hardly be described as some kind of random thuggery, can it NS.

[Nearly Sane]

But your whole thesis seems to be that there wasn't much organisation and that the guy who was jailed for 3 years was just a random drunk thug. You are wrong on both counts.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/revealed-inside-far-telegram-messaging-070915614.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJaHaZwr7AuyFXpnr4730YKgymaQegJ09lU5-5jC9lGaxL-EPfmRkMQD6RpmzkpI7jN2F_vjJV6-GHQ3qFsJVR6YnznLz_C2UcHjQYMAsbRfDvFK-X_GmAVzSxVnHekG8B185IjMFqj2KVOuSdJf4hO0gIR40nlYBtmzC8-Hb8ZC

Note this:

"Following the killings, a broadcast channel on messaging app Telegram was set up, titled ‘Southport Wake Up’. It would remain open for nearly a week, amassing over 13,000 members.

The earliest messages in the channel were used to organise and mobilise the far-right rioters in Southport on 30 July who attacked a mosque. It remained open, sharing locations for rioters to mobilise over the weekend, with some of the plans resulting in widespread disorder and destruction of property."

Sounds pretty organised to me and if someone received this information, either directly or indirectly, and on that basis decided to travel 20 miles to take part in the riot, then that can hardly be described as some kind of random thuggery, can it NS.

My whole thesis is that this doesn't need that much organisation. The rest you've just divined with your wonky mid reading and even when it's been pointed out that your mind reading is wrong, have just ignored. Again go and read my reply 20 on the thread, nd take the straw or fish back to where you got it from.

[ProfessorDavey]

My whole thesis is that this doesn't need that much organisation. The rest you've just divined with your wonky mid reading and even when it's been pointed out that your mind reading is wrong, have just ignored. Again go and read my reply 20 on the thread, nd take the straw or fish back to where you got it from.

But if you are needing to orchestrate hundreds of people to travel considerable distances to turn up at a place and time in order to cause a disturbance, then that does take organisation and orchestration. And something like Telegram is a really effective way to do it as it has private groups, is encrypted and has never little monitoring and checking.

And what about your comment that someone deciding to travel 20 miles in order to join with hundreds of others to march on a mosque and committed serious violence was just a random thug.

[Nearly Sane]

But if you are needing to orchestrate hundreds of people to travel considerable distances to turn up at a place and time in order to cause a disturbance, then that does take organisation and orchestration. And something like Telegram is a really effective way to do it as it has private groups, is encrypted and has never little monitoring and checking.

And what about your comment that someone deciding to travel 20 miles in order to join with hundreds of others to march on a mosque and committed serious violence was just a random thug.

Because he was just a random thug who isn't part of a group, and probably follows Yaxley Lennon and similar on X. To help you out saying he's just a random thug doesn't mean he just turned up at random, though there were plenty of comments on X immediately after Southport from people saying they were going there, and this was before the misinformation about the murderer.

Again, as covered in reply 20 on here there is a lot of manipulation going on for a variety of reasons but we need to be careful not to just think of it as being addressed quickly. It's the very disparateness of it which makes it harder to deal with. The statement from the police chief seems to me to overestimate the organisation as I said at the start, that doesn't mean that say that there is no form of organisation.

[Nearly Sane]

As a long term republican, Republic seem to be a bunch of pricks here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj08430yervo

[ProfessorDavey]

Because he was just a random thug who isn't part of a group,

Speculation - how do you know he isn't part of a group. And anyhow, what do you mean by a group. As I've mentioned before things have moved on from being a member of EDL or BNP to being a member of various private messaging/social media channels. Do you know for certain that he wasn't part of those groups NS?

and probably follows Yaxley Lennon and similar on X.

X isn't the media of choice for far right groups and their organisers - so he might indeed follow Yaxley Lennon, but may also be directly or indirectly linked to the Telegram channels that were key organisational routes for the rioting. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Yaxley Lennon gave out the kind of organisation details that were being put out by others on Telegram.

To help you out saying he's just a random thug doesn't mean he just turned up at random, though there were plenty of comments on X immediately after Southport from people saying they were going there, and this was before the misinformation about the murderer.

Err so what you seem to be saying is that he didn't just stumble across a march heading for a mosque in Southport at random. And that he made a very conscious decision to travel a considerable distance to be part of that march - i.e. very deliberate, rather than, random decision making process.

So why don't you just drop the 'random' bit, which trivialises things - there was nothing random whatsoever about the events leading up to his decision to travel to Southport to join the riots.

So once we've dealt with your backtracking with are left with the conclusion that he was a thug rather than a random thug - wouldn't disagree with you there. But also I'd add that he was a thug whose thruggery was very clearly organised.

[ProfessorDavey]

As a long term republican, Republic seem to be a bunch of pricks here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cj08430yervo

I read this in the paper this morning and while I'm not sure a personal appearance is expected, he is the head of state - where else would the head of state be completely silent (regardless of whether they have executive role or ceremonial) in the face of a significant challenge to the fabric and social cohesion of a country. Surely it is the job of a head of state to be seen and heard in response to such events.

But sadly our head of state only does half a job.

[Nearly Sane]

Speculation - how do you know he isn't part of a group. And anyhow, what do you mean by a group. As I've mentioned before things have moved on from being a member of EDL or BNP to being a member of various private messaging/social media channels. Do you know for certain that he wasn't part of those groups NS?
X isn't the media of choice for far right groups and their organisers - so he might indeed follow Yaxley Lennon, but may also be directly or indirectly linked to the Telegram channels that were key organisational routes for the rioting. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think Yaxley Lennon gave out the kind of organisation details that were being put out by others on Telegram.
Err so what you seem to be saying is that he didn't just stumble across a march heading for a mosque in Southport at random. And that he made a very conscious decision to travel a considerable distance to be part of that march - i.e. very deliberate, rather than, random decision making process.

So why don't you just drop the 'random' bit, which trivialises things - there was nothing random whatsoever about the events leading up to his decision to travel to Southport to join the riots.

So once we've dealt with your backtracking with are left with the conclusion that he was a thug rather than a random thug - wouldn't disagree with you there. But also I'd add that he was a thug whose thruggery was very clearly organised.

I'm not dropping the random bit because I'm not making stuff up about what I said. Have you watched any of the footage of the riots and violence, it's obviously filled with people with inchoate rage manipulated by others, as my reply 20 on here said 

I'm not trying for a last word here bit of you're going to go on about what I mean by random after it's been explained multiple times, I'll leave you to it. There's been a horrendous atrocity that has lead to frightening bouts of violence which we both condemn, and I think we are discussing how best to deal with that. And yet, and I say this because I cannot see how to avoid moving the discussion on properly without our, I feel as if you are caught in a pattern of behaviour related to previous disagreements, and that we rub one and other up the wrong way generally. I may, if course, be incorrect in that, but given what this is about I'm not going to indulge any further because I'm perfectly well aware that what I have just said about you applies to me as well.

Pax?